Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Breaking the wage structure?

I realise that it’s been a topic on here for a while now but as someone who thinks that at sometime or another this is going to have to happen then I’m interested as to hear posters opinions, or knowledge, of how this impacts on the dressing room in the world of pro football.
I would have thought that pro footballers will have to take it on the chin and that they must realise that sticking to (or roughly to) a wage structure is nigh on impossible when a team has been promoted and needs to bring in new players?
We hear a lot of stuff about disharmony at clubs when this comes about but I have never quite grasped the truth of the matter......surely players have to be realistic in this matter?



Comments

  • edited January 16
    We are coming from a very low base wage structure under RD.
    I don't know how workable it is (what with FFP and all) - but it seems to me that they need to look at all current contracts and see if they can offer relevant up-ticks in wages.  This would make any new top money signings would not upset the dressing room as much as it otherwise might.
  • I would like to think that the club would keep a wage structure,

    especially as we progress and hopefully move up the table.

     

    If the average wage is £1000 per week for example and we finish top half of the table,

    we renew contracts with the players who we think are top half championship and lower

    half prem level and offer £1500 per week.

     

    We buy players of similar quality (paying £1500) and sell or release players that we think won`t make

    it at that level.

     

    Up the wage with bonuses, win, goal, assist and clean sheet.

     

    As we move up the table or league, we repeat the process, that way you keep a structure and keep

    the players happy without putting the club itself into financial jeopardy.

     

    (The figures above are for example, I do not have a clue what our players earn)


  • MS already said that "marquee" players will be paid above the structure.

    He said Bowyer cited Shearer at Newcastle.

    Shearer was clearly a "marquee" player. Captain of England and Newcastle and a goal machine.

    Is Taylor the same for us?  
  • MS already said that "marquee" players will be paid above the structure.

    He said Bowyer cited Shearer at Newcastle.

    Shearer was clearly a "marquee" player. Captain of England and Newcastle and a goal machine.

    Is Taylor the same for us?  
    Due to his length of service and commitment to the club, I would say yes.
  • The same as in every other walk of life, if a newcomer to an organisation is known or believed to be earning more than the rest of the staff, that will cause resentment, even though the newcomer is known as a 'star' in their field and will probably bring benefits to said organisation. 
  • Once this season is over, players will either be retained or moved on.

    If those retained are valued in the longer term, they will no doubt be offered better contracts within a higher wage structure.
    And parity of wages paid will step upwards.


  • MS already said that "marquee" players will be paid above the structure.

    He said Bowyer cited Shearer at Newcastle.

    Shearer was clearly a "marquee" player. Captain of England and Newcastle and a goal machine.

    Is Taylor the same for us?  
    Two tents or camp?
  • Oggy Red said:
    Once this season is over, players will either be retained or moved on.

    If those retained are valued in the longer term, they will no doubt be offered better contracts within a higher wage structure.
    And parity of wages paid will step upwards.


    Think thats the problem we have in this window,bring in too many 'marquee' signings on considerably more money,the apple cart will be upset and the squad harmony we currently have could well turn. Difficult one.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I remember onc e many years ago when I worked,my firm employed someone on far more money than me to do roughly the same job,I was pissed off,I was at an age when I could not walk out,so I took it on the chin.After a year this guy had bought so much new business,that we all benefitted with huge bonuses and big salary increases.So the moral is if a new player comes in and improves the team,scoring ,making goals and keeps us up,then present players will have to lump it as they will hopefully benefit in the long run.
  • It seems that our highest paid player is on around 8K a week, now we have to start paying 15K upwards for a player to pay the going rate.

    To quote Bowyer, "it is what it is".
  • The salary budget under RD was/still is? known to be the lowest in the championship.
    If I remember correctly LB has commented he could not compete with a number of first division clubs, let alone championship sides.
    I don't see how MS can operate successfully during this window and the future without an increased budget put in place.
    Generally our supporters don't demand the world.
    Would make sense though if our budget was not in the bottom quartile of clubs.

    If your spending £50 mln plus on a football club it would make sense not to get relegated.

    HE will realise this of course so hopefully an increased budget will be put in place.

    Or possibly MS convinced HE on buying us by promising to operate a  tiny budget?
    Let's not go there, at least not yet!
  • There being a massive difference between, for example, Taylor (star striker) and Davidson (same position, at the very start of his career) is no problem at all.

    At the moment I would guess that all the "senior" first team players are on between 4 and 8k a week, which is low by championship standards.  Yet we are on course to break even, or make a small profit, this season.  

    If we give Taylor "what he wants" say 20k a week to stay, the bought Cullen and gave him (guessing) 15k a week.  In one stroke you are increasing the wage bill by £1.5ish million a year.  That's before you try and renew contracts for Lockyer, Williams and Phillips then any new signings.  If your not careful you could easily increase your wage bill (and annual loss) by 4 or 5 million, without improving your team. 




  • Cafc43v3r said:
    There being a massive difference between, for example, Taylor (star striker) and Davidson (same position, at the very start of his career) is no problem at all.

    At the moment I would guess that all the "senior" first team players are on between 4 and 8k a week, which is low by championship standards.  Yet we are on course to break even, or make a small profit, this season.  

    If we give Taylor "what he wants" say 20k a week to stay, the bought Cullen and gave him (guessing) 15k a week.  In one stroke you are increasing the wage bill by £1.5ish million a year.  That's before you try and renew contracts for Lockyer, Williams and Phillips then any new signings.  If your not careful you could easily increase your wage bill (and annual loss) by 4 or 5 million, without improving your team. 




    Gallen and Bowyer seem to have an 'eye' for a player, but now they have to pay a few quid more.

    The alternative is relegation.

  • In certain walks of life people command different salaries to their peers. Eg, high flyers in big business or City traders. Football is not a factory where workers are paid a set wage or hourly rate. Allowances have to be made & if you want to progress as a club then you have to be prepared to pay extra for certain players. Strikers transfer fees are usually much more than for a goalkeeper & I would expect their wage to reflect this also. As a pp said, if a certain player (or players) are that good that it means promotion then the whole club benefits. 

    As an aside. Many years ago I changed jobs & joined an investment management company in The City. I had just got my first mortgage & needed a certain salary to reflect this (I was only 21 and many of my friends around my age were still living at home & so expenses were a lot lower than mine). I was told when I started that I was on more money than 2 other people that had joined the same time as me. It happens & players shouldn't go round moaning that x is on £2k pw more than they are.


  • What also happens is that if you impress and do a good job you end up getting more. Whist it is natural, it is not healthy for a footballer to look at what team mates are getting. They were signed at different times and circumstances and you tend to get what you are worth in the end.

    I can understand why you have to be careful with the wage structures and am not advocating you bust it open, but you also have to deal with the circumstances you are in. Say your first choice midfield is full of 7.5s and 8s, maybe even an 8.5. Ideally you strengthen by bringing in 8s and 9s, But if you can't and due to injuries you are having to play 5s. Maybe bringing in a 6 or a 6.5, whilst below what you really want is better in the short term. Even more so if you do it as part of a loan. Maybe a couple of 6.5s on loan now would be great signings. Even that isn't easy I know, but Bostock, who is being linked might come into that category. 

    We have six points to play for in under a week and if we can't bring in 7s or 8s, a couple of 6s or 6.5s with those games in mind (on loan) should be a priority. They will provide better cover when your 7s and 8s do come back.
  • Kinsella had a deal at Charlton that he got the same as the other highest paid player. Great deal for him and he made he got it.
  • I recall last season that DeGea got peed off because Sanchez was on more than him and was rubbish for Man United. Like the fact he was on an obscene amount was irrelevant!
  • How can you not break the wage structure if the intention is to progressively improve the squad. If you each season bring in two or three players that improve the squad then by definition you have to offer those better quality players better money than those that you perhaps signed three seasons before and are being replaced by the new players. 
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited January 16
    Kinsella had a deal at Charlton that he got the same as the other highest paid player. Great deal for him and he made he got it.
    Isn't that also one of the reason he left when he did? I think Roy Keane ended up on a similar deal at United and that caused all sorts of problems. 

    If you want to see a classic example, admittedly in a total diffrent business, google Nash, Hall and favoured nation. 

    It's a good deal, for everyone, all the time you are an indispensable star, becomes a problem very quickly when your not. 


  • edited January 16
    Maybe a reason but I think Curbs had to choose between him and Parker for the position and Parker had become the better player whilst Mark's best days were behind him. It happens to them all but Mark will always be a Charlton legend! 
  • Maybe a reason but I think Curbs had to choose between him and Parker for the position and Parker had become the better player whilst Mark's best days were behind him. It happens to them all but Mark will always be a Charlton legend! 
    Kins' knees were shot, I believe I heard at the time. It was only a matter of time before he'd have to retire.
    Parker was playing his role at Charlton. And Villa made Kins a very good offer.

    Something like that.



  • Logically, performance related pay would be the great leveller.  

    I.e. offer all players a basic salary of x in the same ballpark throughout the squad. Then huge win bonuses, clean sheet bonuses .
  • Our better players might not have been happy with that with the injury crisis.
  • Logically, performance related pay would be the great leveller.  

    I.e. offer all players a basic salary of x in the same ballpark throughout the squad. Then huge win bonuses, clean sheet bonuses .

    There would not be many clean sheet bonuses if @ricky_otto was around.
  • Logically, performance related pay would be the great leveller.  

    I.e. offer all players a basic salary of x in the same ballpark throughout the squad. Then huge win bonuses, clean sheet bonuses .
    So uncle Harry can bring you off the bench in the 90th minute when you are 2-0 to bag all the bonuses :wink:
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!